Three Paris Master Plans, where does freight fit in?

Transcription

1 Gothenburg, March 5, 2015 VREF-URBAN FREIGHT PLATFORM Urban Freight Conference Three Paris Master Plans, where does freight fit in? Lae$$a Dablanc French Ins$tute of Science and Technology for Transport, Development and Networks, University of Paris- Est

2 Acknowledgement v Marie Bocquen$n, intern, IFSTTAR/SPLOTT v Project VITE, French Na$onal Research Agency (ANR) led by Olivier Coutard, LATTS v METROFREIGHT, VREF

3 Three regional plans SDRIF PDUIF General Master Plan Transport Master Plan SRCAE Climate, Energy, Air Master Plan /2050

4 Different scales v Megaregion v Region and metropolitan area v City v Neighborhood v Buildings and streets

5 An increasingly visible urban logistics landscape In the Paris region: v 4.3 million deliveries/pick-ups a week (0.74 per employment job) v 24% small retail, 18% offices, 18% industry, 17% wholesale v 50% more warehouse floor area bw v Increased logistics content of industries and activities v Serving global supply chains, Paris as a trade node v Serving new urban markets: e-commerce, same day delivery v Diversified workforce (0.30 to 0.50 employees/1000 sq ft of WH) v Large supply of logistics real estate

6 Complex metropolitan freight trips Downtown L.A. Amazon fulfilment centers Ports of LA/LB Google Maps, 2014

7 Multiple roles and multiple scales for distribution centers Source: N. Raimbault

8 Logistics suburban landscapes Senlis in the North of Paris 8 Google Maps, 2015

9 The Paris Region A government (regional council) with responsibilities in regional planning and economic development A proxy for the Paris metropolitan area 1300 municipalities

10 The Paris Region A logistics node for the country Increased sq footage of warehouses 1987 to 2008: net hectares built (red) and lost (blue), all warehouses

11 Nine dominant land use categories (LET, 2010)

12 How does freight fit in the three plans? v Freight IS in the plans v Qualitative measures only, little use of quantitative tools and models to include freight in scenarios v Long term vision: vague, sustainable freight v Future is unclear: more or less freight mobility? - Use of tonnages - Ton- kms and veh- km ignored in the documents

13 Climate, air, and energy plan for 2050 (SRCAE) v Achieving Factor 4 (divide carbon emissions by 4 from 1990 to 2050) for Paris region s freight would require: v To stabilise freight demand to 2020 levels v Or to reduce emissions/ton-km by 70% v Or to reach 50% of ton-kms by rail, waterways and clean road vehicles (LNG and electric)

14 Strategy adopted Objectives (common to the three plans): v 1) Modal shift v 2) Clustering, densifying logistics uses v 3) Optimising deliveries, reducing most polluting freight vehicles

15 SDRIF p. 135 Projected freight infrastructure: clustering logistics activities

16 SDRIF p. 139 Projected freight infrastructure in the central area

17 SDRIF p. 127 Densifying industrial land uses

18 Chapelle International project, city of Paris A development project led by a logis$cs real estate company (Sogaris) owned by the City of Paris Innova$ve architecture on a former industrial/rail area north of the city of Paris Logis$cs (including rail), retail, residen$al and offices

19 Optimising deliveries, clean vehicles On- street delivery spaces in sufficient number and well located (use of na$onal guidelines) Off- street delivery spaces: one for each 1000m2 of retail area, 100m2 for offices and other ac$vi$es>6000m2 Access restric$on for trucks raised at 29m2 for all municipali$es Access restric$ons for most pollu$ng freight vehicles (gradually over the period ) Groupment of SMEs orders of clean freight vehicles

20 Conclusion Complex metropolitan freight mobility, reac$ng to AND contribu$ng to urban form Role of logis$cs terminals in this complexity Translated into Paris medium to long term regional planning Large uncertainty

21 References v Allen, J., Browne, M., Cherrett, T. (2012) Investigating relationships between road freight transport, facility location, logistics management and urban form, Journal of Transport Geography, 24, pp v Dablanc, L. and Ross, C. (2012) Atlanta: A Mega Logistics Center in the Piedmont Atlantic Megaregion (PAM). Journal of Transport Geography, 24: v Dablanc, L., Ogilvie, S., Goodchild, A. (2014) Logistics Sprawl: Differential Warehousing Development Patterns in Los Angeles and Seattle. Presentation at TRB Annual Meeting, Washington v Dablanc, L. and Andriankaja, D. (2011) Desserrement logistique en Ile-de-France, Flux, 85-86, pp v Cidell, J. (2011) Distribution Centers among the Rooftops: The Global Logistics Network Meets the Suburban Spatial Imaginary, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35 (4): v Hesse, M. (2002) Changes in Goods Distribution and the City: Physical Distribution as an Indicator of Urban and Regional Development. In Davies, W. and Townshend, I. (Eds) Monitoring Cities: International Perspectives. Calgary and Berlin: International Geographical Union